Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • Early View
  • Archive
  • Authors/reviewers
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Institutional open access agreements
    • Peer reviewer login
    • WoS Reviewer Recognition Service
  • Alerts
  • Subscriptions
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

User menu

  • Log in
  • Subscribe
  • Contact Us
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

Login

European Respiratory Society

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • Early View
  • Archive
  • Authors/reviewers
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Institutional open access agreements
    • Peer reviewer login
    • WoS Reviewer Recognition Service
  • Alerts
  • Subscriptions

“Controlled versus free breathing for multiple breath nitrogen washout in healthy adults”. Blake M. Handley, Edward Jeagal, Robin E. Schoeffel, Tanya Badal, David G. Chapman, Catherine E. Farrow, Gregory G. King, Paul D. Robinson, Stephen Milne and Cindy Thamrin. ERJ Open Res 2021; 7: 00435-2020

ERJ Open Research 2021 7: 50435-2020; DOI: 10.1183/23120541.50435-2020
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

It has recently been brought to the attention of the authors of this article that a critical sensor error exists in the Exhalyser D device (Eco Medics AG, Duernten, Switzerland), pertaining to lack of compensation for crosstalk between the oxygen and carbon dioxide sensors. Updated software (Spiroware version 3.3.1) containing a correction for that error has since been distributed by the manufacturer.

Since the data in this study were collected using that device and reported using a previous software version (3.1.6), with potential implications on study results and interpretation, the authors have reanalysed the original data in the updated software. The updated tables and figures are shown below, and have been corrected in the published article. The supplementary material for this article has also been updated.

The authors confirm that the main messages of their article remain unaltered: that the indices of ventilation heterogeneity Scond and Sacin derived from free-breathing and controlled-breathing multiple-breath nitrogen washout protocols are not comparable, and that the differences in Sacin, in particular, are related to differences in the breathing pattern.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 1

Participant characteristics, lung function and multiple-breath nitrogen washout (MBNW) parameters

FIGURE 1
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIGURE 1

Functional residual capacity measured by controlled breathing (FRCCB) and free breathing (FRCFB) protocols. a) There was strong correlation between the protocols (r=0.96, p<0.0001). b) Bland–Altman plot showing good agreement between the protocols (mean difference (95% limits of agreement) −0.009 (−0.592, 0.555) L, p=0.75).

FIGURE 2
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIGURE 2

Functional residual capacity measured by controlled breathing (FRCCB) and free breathing (FRCFB) protocols versus the gold-standard body plethysmography (FRCpleth). There was good correlation between FRC measured by both protocols and FRCpleth (r=0.86 and r=0.92, respectively, p<0.0001 for both). MBNW: multiple breath nitrogen washout.

FIGURE 3
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIGURE 3

Lung clearance index measured by controlled breathing (LCICB) and free breathing (LCIFB) protocols. a) There was strong correlation between the protocols (r=0.82, p<0.0001). b) Bland–Altman plot showing that free breathing produced a higher LCI compared to controlled breathing (mean difference (95% limits of agreement) 0.21 (−0.44, 0.87), p=0.003)). There was a trend towards proportional bias confirmed by linear regression (p=0.07).

FIGURE 4
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIGURE 4

Ventilation heterogeneity in conducting airways measured by controlled breathing (ScondCB) and free breathing (ScondFB) protocols. a) There was no significant correlation between the protocols (r=0.16, p=0.44). b) Bland–Altman plot showing high between-protocol variability (mean difference (95% limits of agreement) 0.0002 (−0.03, 0.03 L−1, p=0.94)). There was no evidence of proportional bias, regardless of outliers (p=0.83).

FIGURE 5
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIGURE 5

Ventilation heterogeneity in distal/intra-acinar airways measured by controlled breathing (SacinCB) and free breathing (SacinFB) protocols. a) There was relatively poor correlation between the protocols (r=0.33, p=0.11). b) Bland–Altman plot showing that free breathing produced higher Sacin compared to controlled breathing (mean difference (95% limits of agreement) 0.03 (−0.045, 0.103) L−1, p<0.0005)). There was also significant proportional bias confirmed by linear regression (p=0.002). The between-protocol difference in Sacin (SacinFB–SacinCB) was predicted by the between-protocol differences in c) tidal volume (VTFB−VTCB, regression p=0.004) and d) respiratory rate (RRFB−RRCB, regression p=0.009). One participant was excluded from Sacin analyses due to negative value in one trial.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 2

Within- and between-session variability for the controlled and free breathing protocols

Acknowledgement

The authors wish to acknowledge the efforts of Sandra Rutting in the reanalysis of the data correcting for the sensor error for the preparation of this corrigendum as well as changes to the supplementary material.

  • Copyright ©ERS 2021
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

This version is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial Licence 4.0. For commercial reproduction rights and permissions contact permissions{at}ersnet.org

PreviousNext
Back to top
Vol 7 Issue 4 Table of Contents
ERJ Open Research: 7 (4)
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on European Respiratory Society .

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
“Controlled versus free breathing for multiple breath nitrogen washout in healthy adults”. Blake M. Handley, Edward Jeagal, Robin E. Schoeffel, Tanya Badal, David G. Chapman, Catherine E. Farrow, Gregory G. King, Paul D. Robinson, Stephen Milne and Cindy…
(Your Name) has sent you a message from European Respiratory Society
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the European Respiratory Society web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
Citation Tools
“Controlled versus free breathing for multiple breath nitrogen washout in healthy adults”. Blake M. Handley, Edward Jeagal, Robin E. Schoeffel, Tanya Badal, David G. Chapman, Catherine E. Farrow, Gregory G. King, Paul D. Robinson, Stephen Milne and Cindy Thamrin. ERJ Open Res 2021; 7: 00435-2020
ERJ Open Research Oct 2021, 7 (4) 50435-2020; DOI: 10.1183/23120541.50435-2020

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
“Controlled versus free breathing for multiple breath nitrogen washout in healthy adults”. Blake M. Handley, Edward Jeagal, Robin E. Schoeffel, Tanya Badal, David G. Chapman, Catherine E. Farrow, Gregory G. King, Paul D. Robinson, Stephen Milne and Cindy Thamrin. ERJ Open Res 2021; 7: 00435-2020
ERJ Open Research Oct 2021, 7 (4) 50435-2020; DOI: 10.1183/23120541.50435-2020
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Technorati logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Connotea logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
Full Text (PDF)

Jump To

  • Article
    • Acknowledgement
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

More in this TOC Section

  • “Diffuse alveolar haemorrhage in children: an international multicentre study”. Astrid Madsen Ring, Nicolaus Schwerk, Nural Kiper, Ayse Tana Aslan, Paul Aurora, Roser Ayats, Ines Azevedo, Teresa Bandeira, Julia Carlens, Silvia Castillo-Corullon, Nazan Cobanoglu, Basil Elnazir, Nagehan Emiraliog˘lu, Tugba Sismanlar Eyuboglu, Michael Fayon, Tugba Ramaslı Gursoy, Claire Hogg, Karsten Kötz, Bülent Karadag, Vendula Látalová, Katarzyna Krenke, Joanna Lange, Effrosyni D. Manali, Borja Osona, Spyros Papiris, Marijke Proesmans, Philippe Reix, Lea Roditis, Sune Rubak, Nisreen Rumman, Deborah Snijders, Florian Stehling, Laurence Weiss, Ebru Yalcın, Fazilcan Zirek, Andrew Bush, Annick Clement, Matthias Griese, Frederik Fouirnaies Buchvald, Nadia Nathan and Kim Gjerum Nielsen. ERJ Open Res 2023; 9: 00733-2022
  • “A double-blind randomised controlled trial of protein supplementation to enhance exercise capacity in COPD during pulmonary rehabilitation: a pilot study”. Abdulelah M. Aldhahir, Yousef S. Aldabayan, Jaber S. Alqahtani, Heidi A. Ridsdale, Colette Smith, John R. Hurst and Swapna Mandal. ERJ Open Res 2021; 7: 00077-2021
  • “Quit attempts and tobacco abstinence in primary care patients: follow-up of a pragmatic, two-arm cluster randomised controlled trial on brief stop-smoking advice – ABC versus 5As”. Sabrina Kastaun, Wolfgang Viechtbauer, Verena Leve, Jaqueline Hildebrandt, Christian Funke, Stephanie Klosterhalfen, Diana Lubisch, Olaf Reddemann, Tobias Raupach, Stefan Wilm and Daniel Kotz. ERJ Open Res 2021; 7: 00224-2021.
Show more Author correction

Related Articles

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • Archive

About ERJ Open Research

  • Editorial board
  • Journal information
  • Press
  • Permissions and reprints
  • Advertising

The European Respiratory Society

  • Society home
  • myERS
  • Privacy policy
  • Accessibility

ERS publications

  • European Respiratory Journal
  • ERJ Open Research
  • European Respiratory Review
  • Breathe
  • ERS books online
  • ERS Bookshop

Help

  • Feedback

For authors

  • Instructions for authors
  • Publication ethics and malpractice
  • Submit a manuscript

For readers

  • Alerts
  • Subjects
  • RSS

Subscriptions

  • Accessing the ERS publications

Contact us

European Respiratory Society
442 Glossop Road
Sheffield S10 2PX
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 114 2672860
Email: journals@ersnet.org

ISSN

Online ISSN: 2312-0541

Copyright © 2023 by the European Respiratory Society